By Kenneth R. Gosselin
Since word of UConn’s return to the Big East started spreading a little over a week ago, sales of season tickets surged and university donor enthusiasm spiked, boosted by the prospect of a return to past glory — and old rivalries.
“There was an apathy to what was happening with the teams over the last few years, and that had a consequence for the building,” said Michael W. Freimuth, executive director of the Capital Region Development Authority, which oversees the arena. “And that was at all levels.”
“It wasn’t just a bunch of guys getting together to go to the game,” Freimuth said. “It was corporate support, the sponsorships. It was just the general conversation.”
The conversation could change direction as UConn rejoins the Big East Conference, where it was a charter member from 1979 to 2013. Big East membership could come as soon as July 1, 2020.
“I will tell you when you go to a Thursday night game at the XL Center for say, the men, and they’re playing Seton Hall or Providence vs. playing Tulsa, you’ll have more people in the stands," House Majority Leader Matt Ritter, D-Hartford, said. “That means more tickets, more concessions. That means more revenue.”
It also is more likely that fans from Big East teams would travel to Hartford for games because they are primarily in the New England and Mid-Atlantic regions, Ritter said.
Big East membership could provide just the boost needed to attract a private investor to take a stake in XL Center renovations. So far, that has been a tough sell because on top of its 44-year age, the 16,000-seat arena has been a money-loser, with this year’s deficit nearly $2 million. The loss must be made up by state taxpayers.
The push to attract a private investor has developed in the past couple of years after CRDA was unable to sell a vision of a state-funded, $250 million makeover, and political pressure mounted to devote less public money to the project.
“There’s a value to the Big East being in the building, UConn being in the building, having a bigger attendance, playing into the revenue bottom line, that helps us in the public-private argument,” Freimuth said.
Freimuth said it is a far more attractive package to bring to a private investor when you add the Big East to what the state is willing to fund and a renovation plan that has evolved over three or four years.
“We’re ready to go, and we need some partners,” Freimuth said. “It’s a different argument than, ‘Hey, if we come up with some money, can you help us?’”
Gov. Ned Lamont supports additional bond money for the XL Center as part of a bigger vision to strengthen the state’s cities. Vibrant cities — in Connecticut and across the country — are seen as critical to economic development, attracting and holding on to a talented, innovative workforce.
In downtown Hartford, the arena is seen as a key attraction, a piece of the revitalization puzzle that includes more than 1,000 new apartments, the regional UConn campus at Front Street and a minor league baseball stadium.
A state bonding package is expected to include between $20 million and $30 million in each of the next two fiscal years for critical upgrades of XL’s outdated — and in some cases, failing — building systems. The package has yet to be approved, but it is expected to be taken up in a special session after the July 4 holiday.
Lamont, however, says his backing of additional funding comes with the requirement that a “public-private partnership” be aggressively explored. Such an arrangement could unload some, or all, of the financial burden of the arena from state taxpayers.
In the last year, CRDA has scaled back its renovation proposal to $100 million, eliminating a plan for a second concourse and focusing more attention on premium seating in the lower half of the arena.
Ritter said it makes sense for the state to focus on systems such as heating, cooling and plumbing and repairs to elevators and ice-making systems. Private investors would be more interested in the appearance of arena, amenities, restaurants and concessions.
“There’s talk of having standing-room only sections with bars and things like that,” Ritter said. “They can finance those things and get paid back from the revenue that it generates. That makes a lot of sense.”
State Rep. Christopher Davis, R-Ellington, and ranking member of the legislature’s finance, revenue and bonding committee, has been a frequent critic of state funding for XL Center renovations.
“I don’t know if there is an appetite for no arena,” Davis said. “But I don’t think we should commit to a significant amount of public money until we know what the private investment is.”
Davis said the Big East affiliation could attract private investment and the major television deal that comes with it compared with the smaller American Athletic Conference in which UConn is now a member.
“By joining the Big East, more advertising dollars might improve the return on the investment,” Davis said. Even with the addition of the Big East, there are still obstacles to any renovation of the XL Center. The privately-owned atrium that surrounds the arena and retail space is seen as critical to expanding the existing concourse, pushing the ticket windows out to the street and adding more concessions.
CRDA and the atrium’s owner, Northland Investment Corp., haven’t been able to reach a purchase agreement, disagreeing on appraisals. CRDA made a move toward eminent domain last summer, touching off a nasty public spat with Northland. It backed off, but the option is still on the table, Freimuth said.
Ritter said ultimately the goal is to make the XL Center a place that is used more than just when there is a game, concert or other event.
"You have to think about the things you can add to the XL Center that people might say, “Yeah, I’m willing to go there to watch sports on TV or other activities there,” Ritter said.
In court testimony, fired Dunkin Donuts Park developer blames city for last-minute changes that led to missed construction deadline and delayed opening
By Kenneth R. Gosselin
On the last day of a trial over the development of
Hartford’s Dunkin’ Donuts Park, the chief executive of the construction company
fired from the job Friday reconstructed a chain of events marked by major
changes in the project that prevented completion of the ballpark on time.
Robert Landino, chief executive of Centerplan,
testified that Centerplan Construction and its partner, DoNo Hartford LLC,
didn’t expect any major changes when it agreed to a new agreement in January,
2016 after the project was found to be well over budget and months behind.“Our goal now [was] to create a stable project to go forward where the design changes ended, the budget reflected the cost to do the work,” Landino said. Then, “in March, we have supplemental instruction with 106 drawings with significant scope changes. So, it put the whole Centerplan team in turmoil.” Centerplan is suing the city for $90 million in damages claiming it was wrongfully terminated from the ballpark project on June 6, 2016. The firing came after Centerplan missed a May construction deadline, making it impossible for the Double A Hartford Yard Goats to play their first season in Hartford. The project’s insurer ultimately took over the construction, hired a new contractor and finished it in time for the start of the 2017 season. Later, in 2017, Centerplan also was terminated by the city from developing tracts of land around the 6,000-seat stadium.
The dispute has stalled that further development, even though the city has a new developer on deck.
Landino testified Friday in Superior Court in Hartford that the official authorization for some of the millions of dollars in additional work -- some of it correcting code compliance requirements -- did not come until May 3, just two weeks before the May 17 construction deadline. One authorization did not come until the day before the deadline, Landino said.
The changes came, Landino said, as Centerplan and DoNo were putting the finishing touches on the ballpark.
"What hasn’t been talked about over the past several weeks is the work impacted, the existing work impacted by the [changes,] Landino said. Landino noted that photographs shown at the trial appeared to show a construction project in disarray. “Ceilings open, wires hanging, drywall torn apart,” Landino said. “All that was damage -- we were asked to leave the site with virtually no notice -- that was work that was finished that was impacted as a result of the [changes.] That was just extraordinary.”
One major change, Landino testified, were the addition of more than 100 electrical outlets that affected the entire stadium.
“Every corner of the ballpark with finished drywall, painted walls, had to be ripped out and drywall had to be cut, ceilings had to be removed, wires had to be cut,” Landino said. The May 3 authorization also restored a barbecue pit to the project after the city directed us to take it out in March and then put it back in," Landino said, adding that steel couldn’t be designed and ordered until May 3.
Latest Hartford
Changes set off a series of events, including going back to subcontractors on the job and working out schedules and payments for the work, Landino said.
When the trial started June 5, Judge indicated that one central issue that jurors would have to consider is whether the city interfered with the developer’s ability to complete the project on time.
Closing arguments in the trial are expected Monday.